The doctrine of judicial review is severely attacked and criticised even in America where it was first enunciated and applied. Firstly, it violates the principle of the separation of powers as it enables the courts to sit in judgment over the powers of the legislature. It makes the judiciary supreme over all other organs of the State. Secondly, it enables the judiciary to veto and nullify the laws of Federal and of component States or provinces. Thirdly, the supremacy of the judiciary violates the principle of the sovereignty of the legislature which represents the people and expresses their will in its enactments.
As against the elected representatives of the nation a small minority of judges veto the laws and strike down policies which they do not approve. Now the judges are by training and profession a conservative people who are generally worshippers of wealth and votaries of vested interests. They are opposed to new ideas and programmes. Hence they refuse to accept laws which embody new ideas and programmes. They read their own doctrines into the constitution and interpret it in out-dated terms. Critics have pointed out that the American Supreme Court, by declaring unconstitutional many new laws, has applied 18th century theories of economics and social policy to new and changed conditions of the 20th century.
It has shown a greater regard for the rights of property than for human rights. “History has demonstrated that when the Supreme Court held the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, when it found the income tax void, and when it struck down major portions of the New Deal, it was acting in a political sphere, and even the prestige of the judicial process could not save it from political attacks.” Finally, the judges both because of their legal training and their independent status are not sufficiently aware of public opinion. They interpret the constitution with out-of-date ideas and lag behind the legislature and the executive. They are not influenced by new social standards and therefore fail to modify the constitution accordingly. However, since 1960, the judges of the U.S. Supreme Court have greatly changed their attitudes. They have upheld civil liberties and the policy of Negro integration in the cases brought before them.